(CNSNews.com) - A conservative legal watchdog group has decided to appeal a decision in which a Florida judge granted custody of two children to a female-to-male transsexual, ruling the individual is a man under Florida law.

Liberty Council, a civil liberties legal defense organization, said the court erroneously concluded that sex is determined "psychologically" when it ruled in favor of Michael Kantaras, born Margo Kantaras, after a bitter custody battle with his wife, Linda.

By allowing someone to subjectively define their sex, the court sets a precedent for similar rulings on race; for example a Caucasian who thinks he or she is African American, or vice versa, said Mathew Staver, president and general counsel of Liberty Council.

"This case could really undermine all objectivity within the legal system, and we believe that it has great importance to not only the legal system, but also to marriage and to many other classifications that we recognized as protected statuses, such as national origin or race and many others," said Staver, who is representing Linda Kantaras.

In a legally unprecedented ruling in February, Judge Gerard O'Brien said Michael Kantaras could adopt his wife's teenage son and be listed as the father of a child the wife conceived during the marriage with sperm donated by Michael's brother.

Staver is arguing that Michael Kantaras was not legally a man when the couple married in 1989. The marriage was invalid since Florida bans same-sex marriages under its Defense of Marriage Act, Staver said.

As a female, Michael Kantaras had a sex change operation, which included a mastectomy and hysterectomy, and underwent hormone treatment at a clinic in Texas in 1986. His Ohio birth certificate reflects his 1959 birth as a female named Margo, but an Ohio court ordered the document be changed to show his new gender and new name.

The law "provides that marriage shall take place between one man and one woman. It does not provide when such status of being a man or woman shall be determined," O'Brien ruled.

O'Brien's decision was hailed by homosexual advocacy groups as groundbreaking. The ruling could provide a legal definition of gender in the state and give non-biological parents a legal foundation to seek visitation or custody, they said.

Linda knew of Michael's sex change operation when the couple married in 1989. During the marriage, Linda became a Christian and realized the relationship was improper, Staver said. The marriage dissolved in 1998 when Michael Kantaras became involved with another woman.

Staver said more than marriage was at stake in the case.

"The trial judge erroneously ruled that gender is determined primarily by your mind as opposed to biologically, and consequently, if you think you are a female or you think you are a male - even though your biological sex is opposite - the court essentially has ruled that that's what you become.

"Therefore, two females - one thinking that she is a male - could marry and not be in violation of a law that says marriage is between one man and one woman," Staver said.

Liberty Counsel is in the process of putting together the brief, which will be due September 1. Sometime later this year or early next year, the case will be argued at the Second District Court of Appeals in Lakeland, Fla.

"This case could really undermine all objectivity within the legal system"

I am finally starting to realize, that's the whole point (I'm talking the entire left, not the transgenders). They want everything nice and amorphous, with no standard that everyone can depend on, everything subject to change on a moment's notice. We won't be able to depend on the law, only on lawyers and politicians-- and only then, if they're in the mood to serve our interests and not someone else's.

I saw part of this case. And Michael definitely was not the better parent. Michael left the "wife" and chidlren for another woman. And just because Michael underwent body modifications does not make "him" a male.

What about those peope who have plastic surgery to look younger, who have a "young mind in an old body"? Surely the next step is for them to claim a new birth date.

"The trial judge erroneously ruled that gender is determined primarily by your mind as opposed to biologically, and consequently, if you think you are a female or you think you are a male - even though your biological sex is opposite - the court essentially has ruled that that's what you become.

Your honor, I would like to call my next witness, Mr. Paul Hogan. Although he is an Australian actor, Mr. Hogan is a world-recognized authority on the subject of sex determination. With your honor's permission, I would like Mr. Hogan to, umm, er, examine the Plaintiff.

11
posted on 07/24/2003 5:23:24 AM PDT
by Nick Danger
(The views expressed may not actually be views)

I am finally starting to realize, that's the whole point (I'm talking the entire left, not the transgenders). They want everything nice and amorphous, with no standard that everyone can depend on, everything subject to change on a moment's notice. We won't be able to depend on the law, only on lawyers and politicians-- and only then, if they're in the mood to serve our interests and not someone else's.

++++

My nomination for Quote of the Day. Our system is under attack by these forces who cannot win in legislatures. They use the courts and activist groups to pressure the rest of us.

They want everything nice and amorphous, with no standard that everyone can depend on, everything subject to change on a moment's notice. We won't be able to depend on the law, only on lawyers and politicians

That's what's meant by the phrase "rule of lawyers".

13
posted on 07/24/2003 6:00:57 AM PDT
by Paleo Conservative
(Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)

I see your point. It had to be a tough case for the judge. It was apparent that Michael was the most stable/nurturing parent, psychologically. Traditionally, the mother, especially since she was not a transgendered individual....would get the kids. However, a point that no one confronted was the fact that the mother must have been somewhat of a lesbian to marry a man who was pretty much physically a woman.

Yes, it was probably very difficult to find just the right words to make his social experimentation sound reasonable. That's why he went on for 800 pages about it.It was apparent that Michael was the most stable/nurturing parent, psychologically

Yes, especially after the natural mother became a Christian and realized that, no matter how you slice it, she was living in a lesbian relationship with a freak.

Can't possibly have the children raised around that kind of bigotry, can we? It's just not healthy.

Why is the mother more qualified and less aberrant in her sexual orientation than the father? I don't defend either parent's sexual identity, but becoming Christian doesn't paint everything over with a broad brush, negating those choices or proclivities. The kids welfare, in that they need to be with one or the other parent, is the most important. Those 800 pages from the judge is immaterial to all but the judge, his defenders and detractors. The kids, from my observation of the trial, are with the least toxic parent.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.